MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Pick the option that sounds closest to what you are looking for. We all get that the core model can have things added and taken away from. Adding or removing a flag system as an eg. Please try and read them all before you vote.

1. Large open world continent for PvE and a large open world continent for PvP. Letting guilds build castles and keeps that can be sieged. Maybe a flag system depending on SoE. Some mixing of PvP and PvE. Lots of open world PvP and tends to feel sandboxish. Kinda like Archeage.

2. Ever race plays together in one open world. You pick a faction and PvP for that faction on a PvP map set aside from the PvE area. With castles and keeps that can be sieged (maybe again build by guilds). When your done PvPing you come back to play with everyone from every faction. Something like Rift.

3. GW2 Model: You play PvE with your server and no PvP takes place anywhere. Q up and fight 2 other servers in a battleground map thats so large it almost feels like open world but not really. Every few weeks you fight different servers. PvP and PvE never mix.

4. ESO model: 3 faction model done like DAoC with a twist. Castles and keeps that can be sieged, open world dungeons and a mega dungeon the winning side of the PvP battle gets to use that has phat loot. Has towns with quest hubs and crafting nodes for top level crafting on this battleground. Has so much PvE on the map it feels much more like open world but again not fully. No lowbe hunting. PvP and PvE never mix unless you want to PvE on the PvP map.

5. DAoC model: 3 factions fight on a battleground with castles and keeps that can be sieged. Instanced dungeon with wicked loot the 3 factions fight to control and own that has phat loot.The race you pick sets what faction you play with. PvP and PvE never mix and you play how you want. And you always fight the same group of guilds from the other factions. You get to know their tactics and this creates a real depth in the PvP but still not really open world.

6. FFA PvP, everywhere and any where. What else they add like castles and keeps that can be sieged, is up to SoE but its more about PvP can be anywhere. PvP and PvE mix allot and may or may not have a flag system. may or may not have factions and sometimes safe areas. Like SWG, EVE and Linage 2.

7. WoW model: PvE and PvP servers with contested zones on the PvP servers and more contested PvP zones the higher level you get. Even on PvE servers you must deal with the flag system and forced to PvP, there are some well known methods for doing that.

8. Other: Explain

9. No PvP system at all, lets make it all about PvE so skills and classes never have to be balanced so we have pure PvE.

What would you pick???

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

(login to vote)

=-D Only on a forum can optimism be called the bad thing and pessimism is the good thing =-D

Report this post

Intelligent PvP with real consequences. If you kill another innocent player, you should be treated as a murderer by all.

It has to be meaningful, otherwise you have Dark fall, which has already be done to death.

Killing for the sake of killing is boring, it trivializes death and murder, and there are metric crapton of games like that already. Darkfalls PvP is not hardcore, its safe and familiar, death and killing have little meaning, as they happen a lot and players have extra armor sets, extra mounts..., its a safe predictable system in the end.

I hope EQN breaks the mold, and not have the same old tired PvP, that means nothing in the end.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

I voted for no PvP. In my experience, PvP has NEVER been done well in pretty much any game and either ruins immersion or PvE balance.

In the "real world", any person can kill anyone else at any time. In the "real world", there are consequences that result in 99% of the population never doing it. Until such time as a developer can design a thorough enough consequence system to mimic this, it's just simpler to have no PvP at all.

If there is to be PvP, i would like to have PvP skills, levels and gear be completely separate from PvE. I hate seeing massive nerfs or adjustments to PvE combat just because someone found a way to exploit something in PvP. In terms of open world vs. not, I am fully ok with open world pvp anytime, anywhere, so long as you can opt in/out of it (i.e. flag yourself). I'm sympathetic to people that want to kill each other anywhere they want for fun and I'm happy to live and let live. They can PvP with those of like mind and leave me be to my PvE game.

"I’d rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

If a game has challenging PvE I would prefer that without any PvP. E.g. like EQ.

In case challenging PvE is not possible (for whatever reasons) or PvP is the focus of the game I prefer PvP which has a purpose beside the pure factor of killing others. Example for bad PvP without any purpose: EQ2. Examples for good PvP: EVE, DAoC.

Whatever EQN does, if they do it right, be it with or without PvP, I will like it. If it is some half baked nonsense I will not like it.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

the EQ franchise is one that should have zero PVP....Having it in EQ1 was a pain in the ass and they even changed some PVE things because of the effect it had on PVP.......Make the game PVE from the ground up.....THe problem is that SOE usually tries to please everyone (and you know how vocal those PVP people can get), but almost every single MMO on the market has some form of PVP....For years many of us have been clamoring for a PVE only game yet every single one feels they have to have PVP.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

I loved the DAoC model. By far the best PvP I have ever played. Its simple, it has depth you dont get unless you played it and pure PvEers never have to worry about PvP or getting flagged. PvPers have their space and have a blast doing so. Would like to see guild made keeps and castles added to this system as well but I dont think we will see this model in EQN.

=-D Only on a forum can optimism be called the bad thing and pessimism is the good thing =-D

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

None of those? How about EVE with Everquest lore and assets? In the regions around the main cities, you are a lot safer as long as you are apart of your race's faction. Guards are a lot more prevalent. The farther you get into the wilderness, the less guards there are and finally you reach a point where players can guild their own cities and they create their own factions.

I will throw my vote behind FFA since the rest of the options are just bad.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by ice-vortexNone of those? How about EVE with Everquest lore and assets? In the regions around the main cities, you are a lot safer as long as you are apart of your race's faction. Guards are a lot more prevalent. The farther you get into the wilderness, the less guards there are and finally you reach a point where players can guild their own cities and they create their own factions.

That would be other... sorry never played Eve and have no clue what its about. The little I read didnt appeal to me. Or would it fall under FFA PvP. Is it not?

=-D Only on a forum can optimism be called the bad thing and pessimism is the good thing =-D

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Nanfoodle

Pick the option that sounds closest to what you are looking for. We all get that the core model can have things added and taken away from. Adding or removing a flag system as an eg. Please try and read them all before you vote.

1. Large open world continent for PvE and a large open world continent for PvP. Letting guilds build castles and keeps that can be sieged. Maybe a flag system depending on SoE. Some mixing of PvP and PvE. Lots of open world PvP and tends to feel sandboxish. Kinda like Archeage.

2. Ever race plays together in one open world. You pick a faction and PvP for that faction on a PvP map set aside from the PvE area. With castles and keeps that can be sieged (maybe again build by guilds). When your done PvPing you come back to play with everyone from every faction. Something like Rift.

3. GW2 Model: You play PvE with your server and no PvP takes place anywhere. Q up and fight 2 other servers in a battleground map thats so large it almost feels like open world but not really. Every few weeks you fight different servers. PvP and PvE never mix.

4. ESO model: 3 faction model done like DAoC with a twist. Castles and keeps that can be sieged, open world dungeons and a mega dungeon the winning side of the PvP battle gets to use that has phat loot. Has towns with quest hubs and crafting nodes for top level crafting on this battleground. Has so much PvE on the map it feels much more like open world but again not fully. No lowbe hunting. PvP and PvE never mix unless you want to PvE on the PvP map.

5. DAoC model: 3 factions fight on a battleground with castles and keeps that can be sieged. Instanced dungeon with wicked loot the 3 factions fight to control and own that has phat loot.The race you pick sets what faction you play with. PvP and PvE never mix and you play how you want. And you always fight the same group of guilds from the other factions. You get to know their tactics and this creates a real depth in the PvP but still not really open world.

6. FFA PvP, everywhere and any where. What else they add like castles and keeps that can be sieged, is up to SoE but its more about PvP can be anywhere. PvP and PvE mix allot and may or may not have a flag system.

7. WoW model: PvE and PvP servers with contested zones on the PvP servers and more contested PvP zones the higher level you get. Even on PvE servers you must deal with the flag system and forced to PvP, there are some well known methods for doing that.

8. Other: Explain

9. No PvP system at all, lets make it all about PvE so skills and classes never have to be balanced so we have pure PvE.

Report this post

Explain why you are reporting this post:(750 characters max.)

Originally posted by Nanfoodle

Originally posted by ice-vortexNone of those? How about EVE with Everquest lore and assets? In the regions around the main cities, you are a lot safer as long as you are apart of your race's faction. Guards are a lot more prevalent. The farther you get into the wilderness, the less guards there are and finally you reach a point where players can guild their own cities and they create their own factions.

That would be other... sorry never played Eve and have no clue what its about. The little I read didnt appeal to me. Or would it fall under FFA PvP. Is it not?

It would be FFA except that no one can reasonably try to PVP in highsec, though you still aren't 100% completely safe there.

Report this post

Intelligent PvP with real consequences. If you kill another innocent player, you should be treated as a murderer by all.

It has to be meaningful, otherwise you have Dark fall, which has already be done to death.

Killing for the sake of killing is boring, it trivializes death and murder, and there are metric crapton of games like that already. Darkfalls PvP is not hardcore, its safe and familiar, death and killing have little meaning, as they happen a lot and players have extra armor sets, extra mounts..., its a safe predictable system in the end.

I hope EQN breaks the mold, and not have the same old tired PvP, that means nothing in the end.

Lol, Age Of Wushu/Wulin has already broken the mold, you just don't know it because you haven't played it.